Black Hills vs Clearway Energy
BKH and CWEN side by side, both in electric services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BKH and CWEN compare
Black Hills and Clearway Energy are about the same size, with market caps of $6.6B and $7.0B.
Clearway Energy grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (21.2% versus 2.8% for Black Hills).
Black Hills keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 13.5% compared with −4.8% at Clearway Energy.
Both pay dividends: Black Hills yields 3.2% and Clearway Energy 5.4%.
Black Hills scores higher on the StockData Score (10 against 7 for Clearway Energy), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | BKH | CWEN |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $6.6B | $7.0B |
| Share price | $86.96 | $34.29 |
| Change, 1 year | 22.3% | −2.8% |
| Change, 5 years | 33.3% | −11.3% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.51 | 0.53 |
| Employees | 257 | 60 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 (better) | 7 |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Performance score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend score | 3 | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 20.9× | – |
| P/S | 2.8× (better) | 4.2× |
| P/B | 1.7× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 12.8× (better) | 20.1× |
| P/FCF | – | 11.7× |
| PEG | 249.17 | – |
| FCF yield | −4.7% | 8.6% (better) |
| Fair value | $80.86 | $31.37 |
| Margin of safety | −7.5% (better) | −9.3% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 2.8% | 21.2% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 6.4% (better) | 3.6% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 10.7% (better) | −131% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 5.1% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 1.7% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | – | 64.1% |
| Operating margin | 24.3% (better) | 14.0% |
| Net margin | 13.5% (better) | −4.8% |
| FCF margin | −13.5% | 36.2% (better) |
| Return on equity | 8.2% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 6.0% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.13 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 5.13 (better) | 9.19 |
| Interest coverage | 2.8× (better) | 0.7× |
| Current ratio | 0.47 | 1.47 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.03 (better) | 0.54 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.2% | 5.4% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 67.0% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 4.5% | – |
| Buyback yield | −1.0% (better) | −1.4% |
| Shareholder yield | 2.2% | 4.0% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 103% | 51.2% |
| Held by insiders | 0.57% | 83.2% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$305K | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 16.9% | 21.3% |
Go deeper
- BKH stock overview
- BKH income statement
- BKH valuation and score
- CWEN stock overview
- CWEN income statement
- CWEN valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.